Simple Saliva Sample Collection for the Detection of SARS-CoV-2 Variants Compared With Nasopharyngeal Swab Sample

Author:

Jo Sung Jin12,Kim Jungrok1,Kim Sehee12,Kim Jingyeong12,Kwon Hyunmi1,Kwon Yongjun1,Kim Hyunjin,Kim Hwan Hee3,Lee Heayon3,Kim Sei Won3,Yeo Chang Dong3,Lee Sang Haak3,Lee Jehoon12

Affiliation:

1. From the Department of Laboratory Medicine (Jo, Jungrok Kim, S. Kim, Jingyeong Kim, H. Kwon, Y. Kwon, H. Kim, J. Lee), Eunpyeong St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea

2. The Infectious Disease Laboratory Research Center (Jo, S. Kim, Jingyeong Kim, J. Lee), Eunpyeong St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea

3. The Division of Pulmonary in the Department of Internal Medicine (H. H. Kim, H. Lee, S. W. Kim, Yeo, S. H. Lee), Eunpyeong St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea

Abstract

Context.— The use of saliva samples for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection offers several advantages, including ease of sample collection, feasibility of self-collection, and minimization of medical staff exposure to infection. The emergence of new SARS-CoV-2 variants has had an impact on the viral load of specimens and the results of real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR). Objective.— To compare nasopharyngeal swab and saliva samples for the diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 using rRT-PCR. Design.— In this study, participants were recruited prospectively, and paired nasopharyngeal swab and saliva samples were collected simultaneously from each participant. After adding universal transport medium, RNA was extracted in an identical manner for both sample types, and samples were tested using rRT-PCR. In addition, samples with positive results were tested for SARS-CoV-2 variants. Results.— Of the 338 paired samples, 100 nasopharyngeal swab and 101 saliva samples tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. The rRT-PCR results of the saliva and nasopharyngeal swab samples showed a positive percent agreement of 95.0% (95% CI, 88.7%–98.4%), a negative percent agreement of 97.9% (95% CI, 95.2%–99.3%), and an overall percent agreement of 96.8% (95% CI, 94.3%–98.4%). SARS-CoV-2 was detected in the saliva samples of 6 participants with negative nasopharyngeal sample results. In addition, the sensitivity of saliva samples was similar to that of nasopharyngeal samples for detecting various SARS-CoV-2 variants, including the Omicron variant. Conclusions.— Saliva samples can be used as an alternative to nasopharyngeal samples for convenient and effective detection of various SARS-CoV-2 variants.

Publisher

Archives of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine

Subject

Medical Laboratory Technology,General Medicine,Pathology and Forensic Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3